Should A Council President Have the Right to Circumvent Criticism with Bannings?
By Lev D. Zilbermints
NEWARK – The conflict between Newark residents and the Municipal Council shows no signs of being resolved. Indeed, the conflict has carried over into 2023, with more citizens alleging the City Council President, LaMonica McIver, is abusing her power to remove those that criticize her from Council meetings.
“Local Talk” published three articles in September and October 2022 about the ongoing conflict between residents and the Municipal Council. The current article is the fourth in a series. As per established practice, “Local Talk” cites its sources, such as these may be.
Felicia Alston-Singleton, a Newark resident, told “Local Talk” that she was banned from attending Council Meetings on 11/14/22 and 11/22/22. Ms. Alston-Singleton provided “Local Talk” with a letter dated 11/4/22 from Kecia Daniels, the Acting City Clerk. The letter states that “…Council President McIver advised you on multiple occasions that your continued outbursts and behavior during the meeting were not only rude, disruptive and a distraction to the proceedings they were selfish and extremely disrespectful to the rights of others in attendance. Accordingly, Council President McIver exercised the authority of her office, and directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to comply with her request for your prompt removal. The Council President’s prudent decision afforded other members of the public the opportunity to voice their concerns and opinions with civil discourse and discussion on important City business without unwarranted distractions and interruptions.”
Ms. Alston-Singleton responded with an email, a copy of which was provided to “Local Talk”. According to the November 6, 2022 email, Ms. Alston-Singleton stated that she wanted to retain a lawyer to defend her rights. The email “shall serve as a request to appeal the unjust decision made by Council President. The letter I received didn’t include my rights to appeal this decision that I am entitled to”, Ms. Alston-Singleton wrote.
In her email, Ms. Alston-Singleton states that “this is my first time ever being removed by the instructions of a Council President.” Ms. Alston-Singleton admits that she shouted at the November 2 Council meeting, “You (LaMonica McIver) should have asked Victor for the emergency homeless vouchers instead of questioning him about Stephen Crane.”
This, according to both Alston-Singleton and McIver, “was classified as rude, disruptive and a distraction.” At this point, the Council President apparently asked the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove Ms. Alston-Singleton from the Municipal Council meeting.
Ms. Alston-Singleton stated in her email, “I have justified urgency to this situation by emails of concern for the residents of Riviera Hotel. Some of which were placed in apartments, families with newborns placed in shelters, and others that were kicked out.”
Description of Incident
“At the time of incident the Hearings of Citizens was closed. Corporate Counsel had given a response to Citizen’s Comments. Councilman Gonzalez had a response of urgency as well and was not pleased with the 7-member family that was placed in a shelter. At that time I said what could have been done. And at that point was asked (by Council President LaMonica McIver) to be removed by police,” Alston-Singleton wrote in her email.
Thus, instead of appreciating and accepting a Newark resident’s help, the Council President had her removed.
Point of Contention
The point of contention seems to be the fact that prior to removing someone, the Council President has to give a warning. According to Ms. Alston-Singleton, this was never done. According to Municipal Council Rule XVIII, Section B, “Any person who has been declared out of order by the Presiding Officer and has been asked to cease speaking and to sit down shall comply immediately or he shall forthwith be removed from the meeting, unless permission to continue or again address the Municipal Council is granted by the majority vote of the Municipal Council.”
Ms. Alston-Singleton mentioned two recent federal court opinions in her email to Council President McIver. In Enge v. City of Portland, the federal district court for Oregon ruled that a government may not “prospectively exclude individuals from future public meetings merely because they have been disruptive in the past.” Another opinion, by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, held, in Reza v. Pearce that “imposing a complete ban” on a person’s entry into a government building “clearly exceeds the bounds of reasonableness” established under First Amendment jurisprudence.
In her email, Ms. Alston-Singleton says, “It is not uncommon for a person desiring to make their point to cause several disruptions at the same meeting or over a series of meetings. The constant disruption of public meetings by the same person, despite repeated warnings and removals, often leads public officials to consider suspending the person from future public meetings (otherwise known as issuing a trespass order).”
Ms. Alston-Singleton pointed out that when speakers who agreed with the City Council’s viewpoint spoke or shouted, no one was removed.
“I also would like for all the Members of Council to sit back and think when favorable comments was being yelled out not one resident was thrown out. Keep in mind when decision making for a set group of people, such a freedom of speech for all must be neutral,” Ms. Alston-Singleton wrote in her email.
“Local Talk” saw Ms. Alston-Singleton attend a City Council meeting in March 2023. Ms. Alston-Singleton spoke at the meeting, so this means the ban is no longer in effect.
Council President, Acting City Clerk, Corporate Counsel all fail to respond
“Local Talk” reached out to Council President LaMonica McIver for her side of the story. In an email response, the council president told “Local Talk” to contact either Acting City Clerk Kecia Daniels or the Legal Representative. Asked via email who the Legal Counsel for the City of Newark was, Ms. McIver told “Local Talk” to ask Ms. Daniels that question. As of press time, Ms. Daniels has not responded to “Local Talk’s” questions.
“Local Talk” attempted to contact Corporate Counsel Kenyatta Stewart, who is known to represent the City of Newark on legal matters. However, the email sent to Counselor Stewart came back. Apparently, Counselor Stewart has blocked emails from reporters and those would ask hard questions.
Since 2014, no one ever threatened Council members or the public
Ms. Alston-Singleton wrote that no one ever threatened the Municipal Council or exhibited violence.
“Never has any resident that attended a council meeting since I started attending in 2014 has ever exhibited any violence or threatened any council member or anyone else…”, Ms. Alston-Singleton wrote in her email.
Intimidation
Ms. Alston-Singleton stated that having a lot of police officers at City council meetings was “excessive” and “intimidating”.
“…3 police officers had to surround them, blocking them in the chamber seating. This was excessive and intimidating force of removal”, Ms. Alston-Singleton wrote in her email.
Under Municipal Council Rule XVIII, Sections C and D, “No person, unless they are a bona fide law enforcement officer, shall enter the Municipal Council Chamber with any items which may be construed as being a potential weapon. Further, persons who have been called upon to address the Members of the Municipal Council shall be prohibited from approaching the Municipal Council rail with any items which could be used for the concealment of any substance or weapons.”
“The Chief of the Police Department or her designee(s) shall be the sergeant-at-arms of the Municipal Council meetings. She shall carry out all orders and instructions given by the Presiding Officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at the Municipal Council meetings.”
From a legal point of view, there is no limit on how many police officers are at Municipal Council meetings.
“Local Talk” saw at least 5 police officers, all armed, at the March 15 Municipal Council meeting.
